paint-brush
Examining Jurisdiction, Venue, and Commerce in Apple's Antitrust Sagaby@legalpdf

Examining Jurisdiction, Venue, and Commerce in Apple's Antitrust Saga

by Legal PDF: Tech Court CasesMarch 26th, 2024
Read on Terminal Reader
Read this story w/o Javascript
tldt arrow

Too Long; Didn't Read

The United States asserts its authority in an antitrust case against Apple, citing violations of the Sherman Act and examining jurisdiction, venue, and commerce laws as part of the legal proceedings.
featured image - Examining Jurisdiction, Venue, and Commerce in Apple's Antitrust Saga
Legal PDF: Tech Court Cases HackerNoon profile picture

United States v. Apple INC Court Filing, retrieved on March 21, 2024 is part of HackerNoon’s Legal PDF Series. You can jump to any part in this filing here. This part is 18 of 25.

VIII. Jurisdiction, Venue, and Commerce

191. The United States brings this action pursuant to Section 4 of the Sherman Act, 15 U.S.C § 4, to prevent and restrain Apple’s violations of Section 2 of the Sherman Act, 15 U.S.C. § 2.


192. The Attorneys General assert these claims based on their independent authority to bring this action pursuant to Section 16 of the Clayton Act, 15 U.S.C. § 26, and common law, to obtain injunctive and other equitable relief based upon Apple’s anticompetitive practices in violation of Section 2 of the Sherman Act, 15 U.S.C. § 2.


193. The Attorneys General are the chief legal officers of their respective states. They have authority to bring actions to protect the economic wellbeing of their states and residents, and to seek injunctive relief to remedy and protect against harm resulting from violations of the antitrust laws.


194. Apple’s actions and course of conduct are ongoing and are likely to continue or recur, including through other practices with the same purpose or effect.


195. Apple’s actions complained of herein have harmed, and continue to harm, competition, consumers, and the general welfare and economies of the Plaintiff States. This Court has subject matter jurisdiction over this action under Section 4 of the Sherman Act, 15 U.S.C. § 4, and 28 U.S.C. §§ 1331, 1337(a), and 1345.


196. The Court has personal jurisdiction over Apple, and venue is proper in this District under Section 12 of the Clayton Act, 15 U.S.C. § 22, and under 28 U.S.C. § 1391, because Apple transacts business and is found within this District.


197. Apple is a corporation headquartered in Cupertino, California. Apple is one of the largest publicly traded companies in the world, generating hundreds of billions of dollars from the sale of smartphones, computers, tablets, and related services and accessories.


198. Apple engages in, and its activities substantially affect, interstate trade and commerce. Apple provides a range of products and services that are marketed, distributed, and offered to consumers throughout the United States, in the plaintiff States, across state lines, and internationally.



Continue Reading Here.


About HackerNoon Legal PDF Series: We bring you the most important technical and insightful public domain court case filings.


This court case retrieved on March 21, 2024, from justice.gov is part of the public domain. The court-created documents are works of the federal government, and under copyright law, are automatically placed in the public domain and may be shared without legal restriction.